Upload
vanthuy
View
222
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MATERNAL ANTHROPOMETRY AND PREGNANCY OUTCOMES: A REVIEW
Sajal Gupta, Department of Reproductive Biomedecine, National Institute of Health&Family
Welfare, Delhi, India.
Regina Kulier, Department of Obstetrics&Gynecology, University Hospital of
Geneva,Switzerland.
OBJECTIVES
n To assess the degree of anthropometric indicators being useful and predictive of maternal outcomes in pregnancy (including complications during pregnancy, labour and delivery).
n To determine the association of anthropometric indicators and fetal outcomes (including LBW, Preterm birth).
n To determine quantitative association of specific indicators andcombinations of indicators and pregnancy outcomes.
Types of maternal undernutrition
Type Definition
Underweight mother Prepregnancy wt/ht.<90%ref.wt ;Ht.> 10th percentile
Chronic maternal undernutrition Wt./ht.<90% ref. wt.Ht.< 10th percentile
Gestational undernutrition Total wt. Gain < 15% ref.wt.Weekly gain < 350 gms
Combined ( 1 or 2+3)
Rosso,1990.
Key indicators and the times at which these are measured
Maternal indicator Frequency
Height Any time before or duringpregnancy
Mid-upper -arm circumference Prepregnancy and changein pregnancy
Prepregnancy weightAttained weights-month5,7,and9
Prepregnancy and during ,2nd, and 3rd
trimestersWeight gain : month5-7 month5-9 month7-9Weight gain :prepregnancy-5, 7, 9
Weight change during 2nd,and 3rd trimesters
Prepregnancy and or 2nd
and 3rd trimester
Body mass index andAttained BMI
Prepregnancy and changeduring pregnancy
List of maternal & fetal outcomes of interest
Stage Outcomes & complications
Pregnancy Pre-eclampsia, Anaemia
Labour & Postpartum Assited delivery, Postpartumhaemorrhage
Fetus Low birth weightIntrauterine growth retardationPreterm birthMortality : peri&neonatal mortality
Summary of Odds ratio for each indicator of LBW
Indicator Odds ratio for each indicator of LBWLBW with low maternal height With low maternal weight.
Maternal height 1.7(1.4-1.8)
Mid-upper-arm-circumference
1.9(1.6-2.0)
Prepregnancyweight
2.3*(2.1-2.5) 2.6(2.3-2.9)
Attained weight bymonth 5
2.4*(2.0-2.8) 2.5(2.0-3.2) 2.4(1.8-3.3)
Attained weight bymonth 7
2.4*(2.1-2.7) 2.6(2.2-3.1) 2.7(2.1-3.5)
Attained weight bymonth 9
2.5*2.2-2.9) 2.9(2.5-3.4) 2.8(2.1-3.5)
Summary of Odds ratio for each indicator of LBW
Prepregnancy BMI 1.8(1.7-2.0)
Weight gain
Prepregnancy tomonth 5
1.5(1.3-2.0) 1.9(1.3-2.9) 2.6(1.5-4.3)
Prepregnancy tomonth 7
1.5(1.1-1.9) 2.0(1.4-2.9) 3.4(2.2-5.1)
Prepregnancy tomonth 9
1.6(1.6-2.1) 2.2(1.6-3.1) 3.2(2.1-4.9)
Month 5-7 1.6(1.3-2.0) 2.6(1.9-3.6) 2.0(1.2-3.5)
Month 5-9 1.6(1.3-2.0) 2.7(1.9-4.0) 1.6(0.8-2.8)
Summary of Odds ratio for each indicator of IUGR
Indicator Odds ratio for combined profilesIUGR With low maternal HT. With low maternal WT.
Maternal height 1.9(1.8-2.0)
Mid-upper armcircumference
1.6(1.4-1.8)
Prepregnancy weight 2.5*(2.3-2.7) 2.9(2.7-3.2)
Attained weight bymonth 5
2.7*(2.3-3.2) 3.2(2.6-3.7) 3.8(2.9-5.0)
Attained weight bymonth 7
3.0*(2.7-3.3) 3.5(3.0-4.0) 4.0(3.2-4.8)
Attained weight bymonth 9
3.1*(2.7-3.4) 3.4(3.0-3.9) 3.7(3.2-4.8)
Summary of Odds ratio for each indicator of IUGR
Prepregnancy BMI 1.8(1.7-2.0)
Prepregnancy tomonth 5
1.8(1.4-2.4) 2.7(1.9-3.9) 5.4*(3.6-8.2)
Prepregnancy tomonth 7
1.8(1.5-2.2) 2.8(2.1-3.7) 5.2*(3.6-8.2)
Prepregnancy tomonth 9
2.0(1.7-2.4) 3.1(2.4-4.0) 5.5*(4.1-7.4)
Month 5-7 1.7(1.4-2.0) 2.6(1.9-3.4) 2.7(1.7-4.2)
Month 5-9 1.7(1.4-2.1) 2.6(1.9-3.5) 2.4(1.5-3.7)
Month 7-9 1.4(1.2-1.6) 2.2(1.8-2.6) 2.6(2.0-3.5)
Summary of Odds ratio for each indicator of Preterm birth
Indicator Odds ratio for combined profilesPreterm birth with low maternal HT. With low maternalWT.
Maternal height 1.2(1.1-1.2)
Mid-upper-armcircumference
1.2(1.0-1.3)
Prepregnancyweight
1.4*(1.3-1.5) 1.4(1.3-1.6)
Attained weight bymonth 5
0.9(0.8-1.1) 1.0(0.8-1.3) 0.9(0.7-1.2)
Attained weight bymonth 7
0.9(0.8-1.0) 0.9(0.8-1.1) 1.0(0.8-1.3)
Prepregnancy BMI 1.3*(1.3-1.5)
Preterm birth
n None of the indicators are strongly predictive of a risk for the outcome of preterm birth.
Odds ratios of indicators for pre-eclampsia
Prepregnancy BMI 0.7(0.6-0.8)
BMI month 5 1.2(0.9-1.7)
BMI month 7 0.9(0.7-1.0)
BMI month 9 0.6(0.5-0.8)
Prepregnancy to month 5 1.1(0.8-1.5)
Prepregnancy to month 7 0.8(0.6-0.9)
Prepregnancy to month 9 0.6(0.5-0.7)
Anthropometric indicators&pre-eclampsia
n None of the indicators is strongly predictive of risk of pre-eclampsia.
n Maternal anthropometry is a poor predictor of increased risk of pre-eclampsia.
Summary of Odds ratio for each indicator of assisted delivery
Indicator Odds ratio for assited delivery
Maternal height 1.6*(1.5-1.7)
Mid-upper-arm circumference 0.8(0.8-0.9)
Prepregnancy weight 1.0(0.9-1.0)
Attained weight by month 5 1.0(0.8-1.2)
Attained weight by month 7 0.9(0.8-1.0)
Attained weight by month 9 0.8(0.7-0.9)
Anthropometric indicators & assisted delivery
n There is a recognised relationship between maternal height and risk of cephalopelvic disproportion, (Krasovec K.,1991).
n Only maternal height is predictive of a risk of assisted delivery with an odds ratio of 1.6 with confidence intervals of 1.5-1.7.
n Most other indicators have odds ratios below 1
Odds ratio for each indicator of postpartum haemorrhage
Indicator Odds ratio for postpartum haemorrhage
Maternal height 0.7(0.5-1.0)
Mid-upper-arm circumference 0.6(0.5-0.8)
Prepregnancy weight 0.6(0.4-1.1)
Attained weight by month 5 0.9(0.4-1.7)
Attained weight by month 7 0.9(0.6-1.5)
Attained weight by month 9 0.6(0.4-0.8)
Anthropometric indicators & postpartum haemorrhage
n As with assisted delivery and pre-eclampsia, all estimated odds ratios for various indicators are below 1.
n Most of the indicators have insufficient strength and reliability to be useful predictors of risk of postpartum haemorrhage.
CONCLUSIONS: fetal outcomes
n Studies confirmed the inherent value of maternal weight, height,and BMI as predictive of specific fetal outcomes
n Prepregnancy weight and attained weights at 5 ,7, and 9 months are strongly associated with fetal risk.
n Weight gain is also useful if prepregnancy weight is available
CONCLUSIONS
n The predictive capacity of these indicators strengthens when applied to low weight and height subgroups.
Maternal outcomes
n Prediction of maternal risk was found to be weak with the exception of assisted delivery
CONCLUSIONS
n Peripheral health workers assess women`s health and nutritional status by using simple, low technology methods to detect problems.
n Based on this assesment decision can be taken regarding referral to higher levels of care at the appropriate time.
n Emphasis on the need to continue service contacts.
Framework for maternal anthropometric indicator analysis
Scales available No scales available
Servicedeliveryconstraints
(1)None
(2)Some
(3)None
(4)Some
Early inpregnancy
Late inpregnancy
Early inpregnancy
Late inpregnancy
Singlemeasurement
MUACHeightWeightattained
MUACHeightWeightattained
MUACHeight
MUACHeight
Screening Weight gainMUACHeight
Weight gainMUACHeight
Multiplemeasurements
Throughoutpregnancy
Late inpregnancy
Early inpregnancy
Not applicable
Weight gainMUACHeight
Weight gainMUACHeight
MUAC
THANKYOU FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION